RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02498
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His officer selection brief  (OSB)  that  met  the  CY00A  central
lieutenant colonel selection board be corrected to reflect that he had
been awarded two Meritorious Service Medals (MSMs) instead of one.

2.  The Board Discrepancy Report in his officer selection record (OSR)
be removed.

3.  He be considered for promotion for the grade of lieutenant colonel
by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year  2000A  Central
Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was placed at a competitive disadvantage at the calendar year  2000
Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (P0500A),  In-the-Promotion
Zone (IPZ) for two reasons:  (1) A  discrepancy  in  the  computerized
portion of his OSR, known as the Air  Force  Officer  Selection  Brief
erroneously indicated to the promotion board that he had been  awarded
only one MSM when, in fact, he had been awarded two; this  discrepancy
indicated to the promotion board that he had not received an MSM since
1993 when in fact, he received  his  second  MSM  in  1996;  (2)  this
failure to correctly record the number of MSMs awarded caused a  Board
Discrepancy Report to be generated and placed in his  OSR  immediately
after his Promotion Recommendation, AF Form 709 (PRF), indicating that
an award, MSM 1 OLC, was not in his personnel data system, and that an
inquiry had been sent to the servicing Military  Personnel  Flight  to
locate the document(s).

In support the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement, a  copy
of his OSR, a copy of his declaration pursuant to  28  U.S.C.  Section
1746, and a copy his MSM, 1OLC paperwork.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving on Extended Active Duty in the grade of
major.

The applicant was considered and not selected  for  promotion  to  the
grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY00A and CY01B central  lieutenant
colonel selection boards.

Applicant’s Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) from 1991 through  2000
reflect “Meets Standards” on all performance factors.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO states that although the decoration was  missing  from  his
OSB, the citation was  part  of  his  OSR.   Additionally,  the  board
discrepancy report in the applicant’s record reflects  the  MSM,  1OLC
was awarded and filed, but not updated in the military personnel  data
system (MilPDS).  This would have called attention to  the  fact  that
there was a medal citation for that decoration in the OSR.  Since  the
board members had a copy of the citation to review and were  aware  of
the level of the award, they do not support SSB consideration.

While it may be argued that the contested missing  decoration  on  his
OSB, from 6 years ago, was a factor in the  applicant’s  nonselection,
there is no clear evidence that it negatively impacted  his  promotion
opportunity.  Central boards evaluate  the  entire  officer  selection
record (OSR) (including the  promotion  recommendation  form,  officer
performance reports, officer effectiveness reports, training  reports,
letters of evaluation,  decorations,  and  officer  selection  brief),
assessing whole person factors such as job  performance,  professional
qualities, depth and breadth of experience, leadership,  and  academic
and professional military  education.   They  are  not  convinced  the
contested information contributed to the applicant’s nonselection.

In addition  to  the  Officer  Selection  Brief  (OPB)  the  applicant
received for the CY00A  board  for  his  in-the-promotion  zone  (IPZ)
consideration, they point out that he also received OPBs for  his  two
below-the-promotion zone (BPZ) considerations by  the  CY99A  and  the
CY99B central colonel selection boards with the identical error.  They
question why the applicant did not attempt to challenge the  contested
award when he received  the  OPBs  for  these  boards.   Each  officer
eligible for promotion received  an  OPB  90-100  days  prior  to  the
central board convening date.  The OPB contains data that will  appear
on the OSB at the central board.  Written instructions attached to the
OPB and given to  the  officer  before  the  central  selection  board
specifically  instruct  him  to  carefully  examine  the   brief   for
completeness and accuracy.  If any errors  are  found,  he  must  take
corrective action prior to the selection board,  not  after  it.   The
instructions specifically state, “Officers will not be considered by a
Special Selection Board if, in exercising  reasonable  diligence,  the
officer should have  discovered  the  error  or  omission  in  his/her
records and could  have  taken  timely  corrective  action.”   If  the
applicant had taken corrective action prior to his BPZ looks, his  IPZ
OSB would  have  been  correct  for  the  CY00A  board.   Furthermore,
although he states that he  made  multiple  attempts  to  correct  the
deficiency and provided his military personnel  flight  (MPF)  with  a
copy of the special orders awarding him the MSM, 1OLC, for updating in
the system, he did not follow up on the correction until after he  was
notified  of  his  nonselection  for  promotion.   They  believe   the
applicant did not  exercise  reasonable  diligence  in  attempting  to
ensure his record was correct prior to the  CY00A  board.   Therefore,
they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and  states  that  the
fact that two boards BPZ considered him is irrelevant.  First, the OPB
and OSR are not sent to the member as they  are  for  the  IPZ  board.
Secondly, he was realistic, knowing  that  he  had  no  viable  chance
whatsoever of being picked up BPZ and therefore, manifested little, if
any, interest in the state of his records at the  time.   Thirdly,  he
chose to wait until after he received the results  of  his  APZ  board
before pursuing this matter, a not  unwarranted  approach  since  five
candidates were picked up APZ on that board.

The advisory  opinion’s  assertion  that  his  claim  lacks  merit  is
interesting, and  lacks  merit  itself.   It  claims  that  the  medal
citation was in the OSR and presumably reviewed by the board  members.
While in this advisory opinion they disagreed with his contention that
the board was not likely to have the time or inclination to look  past
the OSB and parse through each and every piece of paper  in  the  OSR,
AFPC apparently agreed with his contention in September 1999.  AFPC is
either not aware of its previous opinions  or  they  are  written  for
reasons of expediency.  Nevertheless, at an earlier point they  agreed
with his position that board members may, but are not likely to  scour
the  entire  OSR  during  the  process,  and  rely  heavily   on   the
representation made in the OSB.

As to his exercise of  reasonable  diligence  in  having  this  matter
corrected prior to the board in question, he reiterated his assertions
concerning his efforts in the midst of his hectic travel schedule.

Applicant's complete response is attached at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law
or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice.  Although the MSM,  1st  OLC  was
not reflected on the applicant’s OSB prepared for consideration by the
2000A central lieutenant colonel selection board, the citation was  on
file in his OSR.  In addition, his OSR contained a  board  discrepancy
report showing that the MSM, 1st OLC was awarded and  filed,  but  not
updated in the military personnel data system (MilPDS).  Therefore, it
is our opinion that the selection board members were well aware of the
award.  We note that the central boards evaluate  the  entire  officer
record  when  making  their  assessments.   After  reviewing  all  the
evidence presented here, we are unpersuaded that the  absence  of  the
cited 1996 award on the applicant’s OSB caused his  record  to  be  so
erroneous or misleading that the  duly  constituted  selection  board,
vested with the discretionary authority to select officers for service
in the  higher  grade,  was  unable  to  make  a  reasonable  decision
concerning the applicant’s promotability in relation to his peers.  In
the absence of such evidence, we find no basis upon which to recommend
favorable action on this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not  been
shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of   the   issues   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of material error  or  injustice;  that  the
application was denied without a personal  appearance;  and  that  the
application will only be reconsidered upon  the  submission  of  newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 19 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
                       Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
                       Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Aug 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 20 Nov 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Nov 02.
      Exhibit E. Applicant’s Letter, dated 16 Dec 02, w/atchs.




                             THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                             Vice Chair